Okay, these issues are not as important as Trump having two scoops of ice cream, when everyone else got one, but they are pretty important....<grin>

For example, Donald Trump is nicknamed "Pele" by his golf buddies, because he tends to cheat by kicking the ball. What does it "mean" when such a powerful man is a golf cheat? inquiring minds want to know

The golf journalist who wrote "Who's Your Caddy?" spent a day with Mr. Trump on one of his golf courses, Trump bragged that his golf course had the biggest artificial waterfall of any golf course in the world, I think the golf journalist just thought it was noisy, loud and distracting. But apparently that is something that Trump thinks improves a golf course, just like gold plate on an escalator. It is like owning a rototiller with fins.

I think that for some people, the fact that Trump is such a violation of aesthetics is the thing that gets to them the most. And for other people, that is probably what they like about him the most. It is a bad criteria for president, but then again, cultural snobbery is a bad criteria for opposing someone too. If the left disliked just Trump as bad taste, one could understand. But, the fact is the left (and the media) have always disliked the right. Maybe if journalism had treated past Republican presidents and candidates with some semblance of respect, people would see the treatment of President Trump as something other than knee-jerk reflexes the left always has towards anyone they deem too "radical" right for their tastes. For the "liberal" philosopher John Dewey, Leon Trotsky was not beyond the pale. There is nothing beyond the pale on the left, for the left, just fellow travelers, whether they be Comrade Trotsky or the velvet underground (not the band).

Replies: Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 03 Oct 2017 at 15:35

Franciscosan wrote

For example, Donald Trump is nicknamed "Pele" by his golf buddies, because he tends to cheat by kicking the ball.

And you're surprised?

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 03 Oct 2017 at 15:46

Really? You two need another thread for this BS?

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 03 Oct 2017 at 15:55

Vanuatu wrote:

Really? You two need another thread for this BS?

C'mon, my post was tongue in cheek. After all, Franky posted the topic as The "Important" Issues.

Quite frankly, as you will have noticed, I'm fed up with Trump. Well, mostly.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 04 Oct 2017 at 01:57

Since we are talking about "IMPORTANT" things, franciscosan should check his points & so should YOU!

Trump made fun of NYT reporter who has some kind of Palsy.

Trump said regarding McCain that "I like people who don't get captured". You can show me where he made fun of McCain's war injuries, please.

Ok? Mr. oh I just edited your post while neglecting all the screw ups in my own writing.

See? Fun right? Are we having fun?

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2017 at 10:57

I don't think that I said Donald Trump made fun of McCann's injuries, Trump made fun of McCann's capture and status as a hero. I also don't think that it was just luck of the draw that Donald Trump did not serve, there was no danger then nor any danger now that Donald Trump would do anything risky (to himself) or heroic. Of course, he is an old man, so I would not expect him to do so. People might make a mistake in believing that he would take risks, because he is a bit of a bully and he can stage things like WWC fights, but real danger, no.

But, McCann supported the candidate who won the nomination, Donald Trump, despite Trump's rudeness. After that, well the legislative is an equal department of government, and McCann is not going to check his intelligence at the door. McCann is not picking a general fight with Trump, but with specific issues, and Trump cannot but help but believe that any disagreement with him, is disloyalty. I don't think that it is personal for McCann, it is personal, and always personal to that wanna-be feudal lord, Donald Trump.

But not being anything in the Republican party, I can be less forgiving towards Trump for mocking John McCann than John McCann can.

I think that McCann knows what it is like when it is bad, and so if he doesn't think Trump is that bad, nor did he think it was necessary to do anything and everything to win against Obama (Obama was not that bad either, compared to the Hanoi Hilton.) McCann believes in the process, a particular candidate may be bad, relatively speaking, but they are not bad enough to throw out the process (which means the constitution).

But, we are here for *serious* matters:( It is traditional to have a presidential dog, and I think that Donald needs one to humanize himself a little. In an editorial in the High Country News (Newspaper of the West), there was a editorial that said Donald should get a Pomeranian, to match his hair. But maybe it is good that he doesn't have a dog, dogs take people away from their egotism. And if Donald got away from his egotism, I am not sure where he would go.

Has President Trump yet endorsed a candy? For the Gipper it was jelly beans.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2017 at 11:26

Vanuatu wrote

You can show me where he made fun of McCain's war injuries, please.

From http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/28/donald-trump-fire-reportedly-physically-mocking-john-mccain/

John McCain’s daughter has criticised Donald Trump amid allegations that the President has taken to physically mocking her father, who is stricken with cancer and suffered life-long injuries as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

Mr Trump has reportedly been imitating the thumbs down motion made by Mr McCain, a Republican Senator for Arizona, when he cast a no vote for his party’s bill to repeal Obamacare in July.

The military veteran is unable to move his arms above his head, the legacy of being shot down over Vietnam, tortured and held as a prisoner for five years.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2017 at 14:08

toyomotor wrote:

Vanuatu wrote

You can show me where he made fun of McCain's war injuries, please.

From http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/28/donald-trump-fire-reportedly-physically-mocking-john-mccain/

John McCain’s daughter has criticised Donald Trump amid allegations that the President has taken to physically mocking her father, who is stricken with cancer and suffered life-long injuries as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

Mr Trump has reportedly been imitating the thumbs down motion made by Mr McCain, a Republican Senator for Arizona, when he cast a no vote for his party’s bill to repeal Obamacare in July.

The military veteran is unable to move his arms above his head, the legacy of being shot down over Vietnam, tortured and held as a prisoner for five years.

EVERYONE is now officially banned from using THUMBS DOWN. Megan McCain might be imagining things, I still haven't seen it.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 05 Oct 2017 at 14:25

franciscosan wrote:

I don't think that I said Donald Trump made fun of McCann's injuries, Trump made fun of McCann's capture and status as a hero. I also don't think that it was just luck of the draw that Donald Trump did not serve, there was no danger then nor any danger now that Donald Trump would do anything risky (to himself) or heroic. Of course, he is an old man, so I would not expect him to do so. People might make a mistake in believing that he would take risks, because he is a bit of a bully and he can stage things like WWC fights, but real danger, no.

But, McCann supported the candidate who won the nomination, Donald Trump, despite Trump's rudeness. After that, well the legislative is an equal department of government, and McCann is not going to check his intelligence at the door. McCann is not picking a general fight with Trump, but with specific issues, and Trump cannot but help but believe that any disagreement with him, is disloyalty. I don't think that it is personal for McCann, it is personal, and always personal to that wanna-be feudal lord, Donald Trump.

But not being anything in the Republican party, I can be less forgiving towards Trump for mocking John McCann than John McCann can.

I think that McCann knows what it is like when it is bad, and so if he doesn't think Trump is that bad, nor did he think it was necessary to do anything and everything to win against Obama (Obama was not that bad either, compared to the Hanoi Hilton.) McCann believes in the process, a particular candidate may be bad, relatively speaking, but they are not bad enough to throw out the process (which means the constitution).

But, we are here for *serious* matters:( It is traditional to have a presidential dog, and I think that Donald needs one to humanize himself a little. In an editorial in the High Country News (Newspaper of the West), there was a editorial that said Donald should get a Pomeranian, to match his hair. But maybe it is good that he doesn't have a dog, dogs take people away from their egotism. And if Donald got away from his egotism, I am not sure where he would go.

Has President Trump yet endorsed a candy? For the Gipper it was jelly beans.

The self centered part of Trump is the natural politician in him. Tell me about all the selfless politicians and CEO's that you know. You can't say John McCann, we know.

It's not fair to adopt a pet unless you know you can devote some time to their care and also emotional attachment needs reinforcement every day.

This POTUS actually works. No time. He should get his son Baron a dog after the way the media has traumatized him. I'd go with the working dogs, Border Collie.

Oh yes McCann knows bad when he see it and he's not hysterical so why isn't that enough for Mitch McConnell?

In what way Feudal? Jobs, tax plan, the wall -all ideas he ran on it's pro American & competitive. How is it Feudal?

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 06 Oct 2017 at 05:39

David Brooks at one time referred to Donald Trump's way of running his business, as a family business, and demanding absolute loyalty as feudal. It is descriptive of the way Trump runs the Whitehouse (or wants to run the Whitehouse) compared to other administrations, and how Trump runs his businesses. Trump seems to have a rigid "us" (me) or "them" mentality. Trump is the lord, (or 'the Don') and everyone else is either with him, or against him. Now there are definitely some people in the media that are against him, but that is true of most any Republican presidency, but most act like ducks, and let the water run off their backs. Maybe if "the Don" acted more like a Duck, he wouldn't have to worry about Mickey Mouse reporters.

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2017 at 11:44

I'll leave his rigidity to Mrs POTUS.

He's honest about being a liar, he is an open book even when he is lying. All economic indicators are good save recent employment drop attributed to the hit after hit by hurricanes. He is good for something and I won't say that about Obama or Hillary. I would admit that while Bill Clinton was POTUS I made the most money of my life comparatively.

How important is perspective? I recognize that the audience seeing ANTIFA start fires and assault people would have been horrified by the police reactions to demonstrations against the war in Vietnam. Compared to the Johnson and Nixon administrations this guy has No Secrets!

Isn't that worth something in the age of near reality?

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 09 Oct 2017 at 23:59

V

1. I tend to agree with you. Trump is a liar and leaves no doubt of that fact.

2. You say that he is good for something-are we talking private or public. If it's the former, I doubt if FLOTUS shares that view, going by some of her public reactions to him.

3. Again, in fairness, I have to agree with you. We hear and read a lot about his lies, twitters and false truth, but very little as to what he's achieving which may just benefit ordinary Americans.

He's a lying buffoon in public, but perhaps, just perhaps, he is making some headway in "Making America Great Again". I simply don't know.

There is in politics, a need for Hawks and for Doves, and knowing which bird to fly at any particular time is a skill he needs to learn.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 28 Nov 2017 at 13:21

President Trump has gone golfing 52 times since January. That's good isn't it? On the campaign trail he said that he would not have time for golfing, because he, unlike Obama and his golfing, would be too busy leading the country.

Just the facts.

Whether you are on the left, or on the right, it's an apple. (CNN motto).

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 28 Nov 2017 at 15:43

I don't think I need go further than agreeing with you.

I stand by the comments that I've made about this bufoon in the past.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 30 Nov 2017 at 04:54

There is no need to agree, or disagree, it is not a matter of opinion, it is a factual statement that he has gone golfing 52 times. And maybe that is good thing, since if he occupies his time golfing, then maybe he'll have less time fighting with the other children. But I don't know what your concern is, he's not your "buffoon." I am not sure name calling really helps (although it is a favorite tactic of _some_ people).

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 30 Nov 2017 at 08:55

franciscosan wrote:

I am not sure name calling really helps (although it is a favorite tactic of _some_ people).

I don't regard it as "name calling", more a description.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 30 Nov 2017 at 11:10

semantics, a rose by any other name, still has thorns. Potato, Potawto.

My point is not that it isn't descriptive, my point is that it isn't productive.

Trump fans are dug in, because they expect to be shot at. Which is a lot of fun for radicals and hotheads, but not productive.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 30 Nov 2017 at 11:22

Mao Tse Tung's policies had resulted in the deaths of 10s of millions, yet Nixon could work with him. What would have happened if rhetoric had kept them from getting along? Mao did not mind that Nixon had some difficulties at home called Watergate, I mean the Chinese didn't understand, it is not like Nixon imprisoned or executed anybody.s But if we get descriptive, Mao was a mass murderer, and Nixon was a crook. I suggest getting past the "descriptions" which may cloak the reality.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2017 at 15:14

What's "Tricky Dick" got to do with my description of the Bufoon?

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2017 at 08:46

If Mao got caught up in the description of Nixon as "tricky," maybe the agreements that Mao and Nixon made would not have happened, if Mao's "human" rights record got in the way, it wouldn't have happened either. Buffoon, "tricky" so forth are name calling designed to define the individual in a bad light so they can be less effective at leading. Less effective (productive) to do positive things, less effective to do negative things, less effective to act because basically people are shooting suppressive fire.

For somethings I don't care about the press acting like monkeys on the monkey island, slinging sh--,

but for other things like North Korea, I think we need a president who is not distracted, by "descriptions" like crooked Hillary that don't add up to anything substantial, or Buffoon which is not productive, just destructive.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2017 at 10:11

Does anybody remember Scooter Libby? Someone on Vice President Cheney's staff, who lied or did something like that, and got caught, and took the fall, I think over revealing that Ms _____ was CIA. But the point is, he was disposable, you have people, that if things go South, who are disposable in the scheme of things. That insulates the people who have the real power.

Well in the feudal world of the Donald Trump administration, you don't have that, instead of giving such a job to someone who is disposable, paranoia means that you trust only people who are close to you, personally close, and emotionally close, like Son-in-law Jared Kushner. In a normal administration, such contacts we would be farmed out to someone disposable, like an Colonel Ollie North. It is not that the administration would want Colonel North to twist in the wind, but let's be honest that's what he was there for. There are ways of arranging dirty tricks so that principals are "out of the loop." That doesn't seem to be the case with the current Presidency, they have no finesse in hiding that they raided the cookie jar.

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2017 at 10:55

franciscosan wrote:

If Mao got caught up in the description of Nixon as "tricky," maybe the agreements that Mao and Nixon made would not have happened, if Mao's "human" rights record got in the way, it wouldn't have happened either. Buffoon, "tricky" so forth are name calling designed to define the individual in a bad light so they can be less effective at leading. Less effective (productive) to do positive things, less effective to do negative things, less effective to act because basically people are shooting suppressive fire.

For somethings I don't care about the press acting like monkeys on the monkey island, slinging sh--,

but for other things like North Korea, I think we need a president who is not distracted, by "descriptions" like crooked Hillary that don't add up to anything substantial, or Buffoon which is not productive, just destructive.

Not sure about this idea that Nixon that did anything but run screaming from Vietnam. Ever heard of McNamara? The man is on tape with Nixon, explaining that President Johnson never asked for proof of victory other than kill rates.

A primitive computer determined that the only possible way to measure victory way enemy kill rates. Nixon is on tape saying that the troops in country could not get the job done, announced a fake-diplomatic breakthrough to save face for the GOP.

Hard to imagine anything less productive than the democrats in 2016. Donna Brazille, interim chair of the DNC had plenty to say about that. DNC & Far Left Loonies can take credit for President Trump

So since you are looking to attack, attack, attack.. then expect the blow back I'm sure you are thriving on it. :) And what's tricky is while liberals were on fire screaming about the impending impeachment and Comey was misleading the public about investigating the Trump campaign- Russia- shenanigans, whoops! Tax Reform. Not one democrat on board. For shame.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2017 at 12:18

Nixon showed that communism was not a monolithic solid block, that China and the USSR did not necessarily agree, and had deep founded distrust and historical animosities. Doing so, he paved the way for Reagan to bankrupt the Soviet Union, by engaging with communism on all fronts.

I have never looked at the Nixon tapes, at least not on Vietnam. Kill rates is kind of the joke about Vietnam, but I don't know the history of how it was used. I think it is interesting how traumatic Vietnam was for the US, while the US probably lost more in traffic fatalities in a year, something like 56,000 dead over 10 years for VN vs. 2-3 million on the NVA side.

Yeah, we'll figure out soon enough if the tax reform is a good idea, and for who it will be a good idea. I don't see any screaming about impending impeachment from anyone in the know, just an FBI investigation that is building, and building, and who knows where it will stop. But, Comey is out of the loop these days, but the investigation like the Energizer Bunny keeps going, and going.

Obama and Hillary are _history_, I mean I am sure they are still politically relevant somewhere, but not really right now in the public discourse. I guess your argument is that Obama and Hillary were so bad that they justify a train wreck like Donald J. Trump?? Maybe, but we are past that point, you have Trump, question is, what are you going to do with him? Make him a Saint? a Messiah, I know, a deal maker? How has that been going? It is everybody else's fault that he insults everyone, and doesn't know what he is doing. Nothing is ever his fault. It is like they said in Communist Russia, "We don't make mistakes." Isn't that a little chilling? The famine in Ukraine was not a mistake (actually, it _was_ quite intentional from Stalin), what will be Donald's un-mistake?

See, I wonder if some of the religious wack jobs on the right look to Russia, and see how Putin has made Russian Orthodox _the_ state religion, and passed laws to promote "family" values (because Russians were voting with their feet), these wack jobs look at that, and cream their pants, how could they get a theocracy like that going here they ask? They don't mind it if Trump is in Putin's pocket, in fact they are hopeful he is in Putin's pocket. Whatever the FBI investigation reveals, does not matter to them, they're in love with Putin anyhow.

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2017 at 12:48

franciscosan wrote:

Nixon showed that communism was not a monolithic solid block, that China and the USSR did not necessarily agree, and had deep founded distrust and historical animosities. Doing so, he paved the way for Reagan to bankrupt the Soviet Union, by engaging with communism on all fronts.

Who besides you believes this?

I have never looked at the Nixon tapes, at least not on Vietnam. Kill rates is kind of the joke about Vietnam, but I don't know the history of how it was used. I think it is interesting how traumatic Vietnam was for the US, while the US probably lost more in traffic fatalities in a year, something like 56,000 dead over 10 years for VN vs. 2-3 million on the NVA side.

Right, now Vietnam is irrelevant and you don't know anything about it.

Yeah, we'll figure out soon enough if the tax reform is a good idea, and for who it will be a good idea. I don't see any screaming about impending impeachment from anyone in the know,

then I guess you don't know bc you were screaming (figuratively) about the big_ bad_ Rob Mueller take down-that NEVER HAPPENED.

about the beig just an FBI investigation that is building, and building, and who knows where it will stop. But, Comey is out of the loop these days, but the investigation like the Energizer Bunny keeps going, and going.

Democrats running on pure hatred that's the energy. There is no end is sight for Hillary & Obama will have more mud on his legacy. People in the "know" ? teehee

Obama and Hillary are _history_, I mean I am sure they are still politically relevant somewhere, but not really right now in the public discourse. I guess your argument is that Obama and Hillary were so bad that they justify a train wreck like Donald J. Trump??

They tied a bow on the presidency and handed it to Trump. Politically they will continue to degrade the democrat brand. Ask their friends like Donna B.

A witness has detailed events for FBI, on Clinton handing uranium over to the Russians after pocketing some ca$h. Comey isn't done he'll be back to answer for letting Clinton slide bc gross negligence is not to be couched by "she had no bad intent." Not his jurisdiction to determine intent.

You might be surprised bc you have lost your objectivity.

Maybe, but we are past that point, you have Trump, question is, what are you going to do with him?

So do you. What's your plan ?

Make him a Saint? a Messiah, I know, a deal maker? How has that been going? It is everybody else's fault that he insults everyone, and doesn't know what he is doing. Nothing is ever his fault. It is like they said in Communist Russia, "We don't make mistakes." Isn't that a little chilling? The famine in Ukraine was not a mistake (actually, it _was_ quite intentional from Stalin), what will be Donald's un-mistake?

Deals are great but you won't see that on CNN. It's rhetoric and Hillary's was MUCH SCARIER!

See, I wonder if some of the religious wack jobs on the right look to Russia, and see how Putin has made Russian Orthodox _the_ state religion, and passed laws to promote "family" values (because Russians were voting with their feet), these wack jobs look at that, and cream their pants, how could they get a theocracy like that going here they ask? They don't mind it if Trump is in Putin's pocket, in fact they are hopeful he is in Putin's pocket. Whatever the FBI investigation reveals, does not matter to them, they're in love with Putin anyhow.

Hmm funny & sad.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 06 Dec 2017 at 10:00

What is it they say, "every clown has a silver lining"? But seriously, emphasize the good, discourage the bad, and frankly I trust bureaucratic institutions like the FBI and the State department (in their sphere of expertise), much more than I trust the grand standing. As far as Trump getting things right, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.... But there are good things coming out of the Trump administration, some of them even because of Trump

I didn't know about Hillary and the DNC, but I am not surprised. Bill and Hillary have always been corrupt. The question is who is more corrupt, Bill and Hillary or Donald. Donald has always seemed more overt about it, greasing the wheels for projects. Donald according to all accounts but his, was not a billionaire when he ran for office, but I wonder if he will be one when he gets done with it. It is good being the king. Only thing is, we are a republic, or representative democracy.

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2017 at 11:54

franciscosan wrote:

What is it they say, "every clown has a silver lining"? But seriously, emphasize the good, discourage the bad, and frankly I trust bureaucratic institutions like the FBI and the State department (in their sphere of expertise), much more than I trust the grand standing. As far as Trump getting things right, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.... But there are good things coming out of the Trump administration, some of them even because of Trump

I didn't know about Hillary and the DNC, but I am not surprised. Bill and Hillary have always been corrupt. The question is who is more corrupt, Bill and Hillary or Donald. Donald has always seemed more overt about it, greasing the wheels for projects. Donald according to all accounts but his, was not a billionaire when he ran for office, but I wonder if he will be one when he gets done with it. It is good being the king. Only thing is, we are a republic, or representative democracy.

Seriously what franciscosan? Seriously- you are good at running away from facts.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2017 at 12:07

I don't see it as "running away from the facts," maybe going overboard with the rhetoric, maybe.

I think you are optimistic about President Trump, whereas I am pessimistic. The problem with pessimism is that no matter how bad it gets (and it is not bad right now), it can always get worse.

The optimist believes that this is the best of all possible worlds, the pessimist is afraid that the optimist may be right.

The optimist tends to be disappointed with people (thinking they could or should do better), whereas the pessimist, having a negative view of human nature, can be pleasantly surprised.

One thing about the media, they try to project a sunny nature, but the fact is they expect people to be "better."

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 07 Dec 2017 at 12:16

franciscosan wrote:

I don't see it as "running away from the facts," maybe going overboard with the rhetoric, maybe.

I think you are optimistic about President Trump, whereas I am pessimistic. The problem with pessimism is that no matter how bad it gets (and it is not bad right now), it can always get worse.

The optimist believes that this is the best of all possible worlds, the pessimist is afraid that the optimist may be right.

The optimist tends to be disappointed with people (thinking they could or should do better), whereas the pessimist, having a negative view of human nature, can be pleasantly surprised.

One thing about the media, they try to project a sunny nature, but the fact is they expect people to be "better."

I am hardly an optimist about politics! lol

Just can't believe that I like President Trump more than I ever liked him in former public life. He actually gets things done to the extent that he deserves his golf time.

You looked at democrats and though "oh yeah, that's my team"(Shudder) now -that's courage, real optimism.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2017 at 02:17

A pessimist is what an optimist calls a realist.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 09 Dec 2017 at 10:22

toyomotor wrote:

A pessimist is what an optimist calls a realist.

Welcome to age of unreal.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2017 at 08:04

reality, wow, what a concept! [album by Robin Williams]

I don't look at democrats as my "team," I look upon them as sometimes, the lesser of two evils. In general I vote republican, Trump is an exception, but in my book, he is not a real republican, but someone who is now carrying the flag, but going the wrong way. He is a carpetbagger. To the extent he wants to make Republicans in his obnoxious image, I am against that. The election of a democrat to Alabama saved the Republicans from a whole lot of headaches in another way. I would have argued about him more with you Vanuatu, but I have been laid up, sick since Monday.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 15 Dec 2017 at 09:49

Not being enarmoured of Trump, I can see a part of what Vanuatu is on about.

I currently read a number of US Newspapers on-line, and I don't see a lot of praise for whatever he's accomplished. Daily reports across all of the papers I read are mostly confined to his frequent gaffes, lies, exagerations and foibles. Who gives a toss whether he drinks six or twenty Diet Cokes per day?

It can't all be bad. What papers should I read to get the other views?

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 16 Dec 2017 at 12:02

I don't know what papers you read, or what you should read. I think that the WSJ editorial page is good. Generally, editorial page feature more conservative writers than the average rank and file, that does not mean that they would like Trump any more or less, but that they approach it from a different angle.

One thing that social conservatives (religious) conservatives like about Trump has to do with those he has appointed. Supreme Court Justices, 'Employment' committee, you generally don't hear about some of the cabinet members, and some you hear about because you would hear about anyone in that position, because the teacher's unions believe they own that position (education). I don't hear about the black doctor who was a Presidential candidate and is running Health and Human Services. I don't know if that is because he is doing a fair job (no news is good news), or just if in the general roar about the Trump administration, complaints about him, (I forget his name), get drowned out. I suspect a little of both.

But in order to understand why the social conservatives, (that are more from neglected rural America), you need to understand the culture wars. A couple of things about the culture wars, first of all, the presentation of the culture wars is biased, pro-liberal, urban, generous governmental support structure, versus Social conservative, rural, self-reliance and religious community as is fitting for someone living in the middle of "nowhere." The urban base has a bully pulpit to preach from, and beat down others. It should be understood that "generous government support structure" is build in and gives advantages to cities, but takes its tax base from everyone including the rural conservatives. The rural social-conservative doesn't necessarily mind funding a cancer ward in the city, because it is a good cause and because people in the country might go to it, although it means no jobs for rural folks. But funding community basketball, or a (liberal) dance troupe, or at art co-op. Those kind of cause do not benefit the rural conservatives beliefs, and might in fact promote others alien causes, as matters 'of course', unquestioned and unquestionable, to the detriment of the conservative views, and in deed, to their very real (tax) expense.

Second of all, what the conservative wants is generally a negative, a want to be free from, they don't see the progress of society, and some want to get off, or at least have the ability to descent, it is not that that they have a program in specific in mind, it is that in the country side, one relies on family, friends and church and civic organizations, and those too get the job done. Getting big government to do it, may seem like a short cut, but in the long run it often destroys the social fabric, which it purports to support. The fact is that countryside cannot become like the city, because the city is hemiparasitic. It self generate its own energy, but it also takes a lot from the rural life, in terms of brain-drain, tax funds. ect.

Wall Street Journal, sorry I usually try to avoid abbreviations, and TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms, TLA itself being a Three Letter Acronym). "What is a a TLA?" somebody asks. Someone answers "a TLA is a three letter acronym," first person says, "yes I know TLA is a three letter acronym, but what does it stand for?"

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 21 Dec 2017 at 22:32

It seems that the most important thing on Trumps mind lately is the Taxation Bill.

Luckily for him it's about to be brought ito the law, and he, personally, and along with many other very rich people, stand to make a very lot of money.

Makes me wonder about conflicts of interest, but they don't seem to exist in the USA. Nor do conciences.

I guess that we just feel that people are "innocent" until proven guilty, and that they should be convicted if the evidence warrants such a conclusion. Or we could always convict someone based on innuendo. If that is what you 'feel' we should do?? If we Americans truly did not have consciences, we could set up a Committee of Public Safety, and let the guillotine sing. Why quibble about details when we always, already know the correct answer?

First the sentence! Then the trial! The red queen said.

But if it makes you feel good to condemn America, by all means do so. But, don't mistake such a proclamation for constructive criticism. If you actually want to help the situation, that is a different matter.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 22 Dec 2017 at 12:42

franciscosan wrote:

I guess that we just feel that people are "innocent" until proven guilty, and that they should be convicted if the evidence warrants such a conclusion. Or we could always convict someone based on innuendo. If that is what you 'feel' we should do?? If we Americans truly did not have consciences, we could set up a Committee of Public Safety, and let the guillotine sing. Why quibble about details when we always, already know the correct answer?

First the sentence! Then the trial! The red queen said.

But if it makes you feel good to condemn America, by all means do so. But, don't mistake such a proclamation for constructive criticism. If you actually want to help the situation, that is a different matter.

I repeat, for the umpteenth time, I am not anti-American. Your President has multiple conflicts of interest in relation to his business dealings.

Maybe, just maybe, the American public will overlook this issue, as they also get a little from the bill, but Trump et al will make millions.

Is this not a conflict of interest, when the President has a bill passed by which he personally will profit greatly? He does this while the victims of Hurrican Katrina, at least the poorest of them, still live in damaged houses, and Puerto Ricans are in much the same situation, is this not a lack of concience?

It would have been far more conscionable had the tax cuts been available only to those who earn less than a certain figure per annum, wouldn't it?

I am not saying that Donald Trump has a conscience, you said that conflicts of interest and consciences weren't to be found in the USA (I paraphrase). Look at what you wrote.

Donald Trump, as I have said elsewhere, has sociopathic tendencies. But then again, so do a fair number of very successful businessmen of the dog eat dog school of business. I think that his followers are deluding themselves. I don't think that blindly carrying out campaign promises makes a good president. The President is supposed to be able to adapt to the situation, Trump seems to want to adapt the situation to himself.

I once had a friend who had a brother who did one of those psychological tests of putting the square peg in the square hole. His brother pounded the square peg into the round hole. The school psychologist, must have had a sense of humor, he said my friend's brother had an anger issue, but otherwise was normal. Trump reminds me of such a kid, pounding the square peg into the round hole. Of course, doing so jams it in there, and ruins the test for future use, at least until you can pry out the peg. Trump doesn't care if things get bent out of shape, and the Republican congress is right now, riding a tiger, they don't really want to be on the tiger, but neither do they really want to get off.

I blame the democrats, if they had had a normal nomination process with several viable candidates, instead of all being intimated by the Clintons, and having only one anointed candidate. If they had actually had a strategy that worked the state by state basis of our elections, instead of just concentrating on urban areas. Hillary did get 2 million more voters, but that is not how our electoral system works. It doesn't matter whether you win California by, say, 1 million voters, or by 5000, a win is a win, winner take all per state. Small states also have more representation for the population, than large states for the same population.

Once upon a time there was a fox, that got caught in the brambles, and thus became infested with ticks. Along came a raccoon, and having some sympathy for the poor fox, asked the fox if he, the raccoon, might remove the ticks for him. The fox said, "no, please don't, you see these ticks are almost full, and if you remove them others will take their place, which would be the death of me, 'cause, they would suck me dry." Barack Obama and Hillary too were the old ticks, I see with them the damage was already done, and they wouldn't of done much more if Hillary had been elected, especially with a Republican Congress. Donald Trump, however, is a much bigger tick, hungry for more. The Clintons were corrupt, but their appetite was in the 100s of millions of dollars, whereas Trump once upon a time may have been a billionaire, and wants to get back to that point, through hook or crook, and the fact that he won't share his tax return, to me says that he doesn't want anyone to know where his money came from, or will be coming from in the future.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2017 at 10:58

OK

Makes me wonder about conflicts of interest, but they don't seem to exist in the USA. Nor do conciences.

Now what? Will you argue that Trump wont benefit from the new Tax Laws?

Will you argue that he has no conflicts of interest vis a vis his business interests?

Will you argue that placement of his children and son-in-law doesn't place him in a position of conflict of interests?

Will you argue that a person of good concience would pass legislation that he will prosper from?

If you are an official and you have a "conflict of interest," you are supposed to recuse yourself. Donald Trump definitely does not do that, ever. What is supposed to happen if someone does not do that, I have no idea. Usually, someone recuses themselves from a conflict of interest, so that the decision, of the court, of the Senate, whatever, is not undermined. But, Donald Trump with his grandiose ego is not concerned with that. Donald Trump may want to un-make Barack Obama's legacy, but his own will be on very shaky ground. Not that Obama's was that solid either. The democrats abused their position in power during their 'leadership,' now the pendulum has seemed to have swung (too far) in the other direction. Barack Obama was the most radical member of the Senate, and did not serve a full term before being elected on a feel-good whim by the American people. All of a sudden, one could prove that one wasn't prejudiced by electing a black man who had no experience by which he could be judged. Of course, proving that one is not prejudiced in a vote, is itself prejudiced. Judge by the content of the character, not by the color of his skin. It has been awhile since judges had to have "no footsteps" in order to be nominated, no controversial decisions, no track record. Now we have that with first Barack Obama, and in another way with Donald Trump.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 23 Dec 2017 at 15:41

It (this discussion) has nothing at all to do with skin colour or experience. It's about a man who seems to think that he can do whatever he wants, without answering to anybody.

He's never heard of the concept of "being elected to serve, not rule."

I know Trump is politically inexperienced, but that's no excuse. If his advisors aren't telling him of the expectations of his office, and how to go about his duties, they should be!!!

I have a feeling that whatever his advisors tell him, Trump goes his own merry way-regardless of the consequences.

Recently, he's stuck his nose into the affairs of Isreal/Palestine, and in the UN, his representative has issued a very thinly veiled threat that "names will be taken" of those who oppose the US in the UN.

I feel for the American people who have sadly elected this man, as someone famous once said, "Forgive them Lord, for they know not what they do."

There are two main strategies for appointment of Cabinet officials, the first is to appoint the best experts you can and let them fight it out, if need be. Trump has recruited some very good people from the military, which is something he seems to respect. The other way is to recruit "yes-men" who will tell the president what he wants to hear. This is what Trump tried to do with the (former) FBI director, have him swear a personal loyalty oath, or that is what it seems. A lot of professional state department people and EPA scientists are retiring, because the administration seems antagonistic to them, I say "seems," but there is no doubt in the minds of the professionals retiring. The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) head has been an open critic of the EPA in the past, I don't remember if he has gone so far as call for its abolition, but he definitely wants to gut it.

Unfortunately politics in America has a lot to do with race. The media calls some of Trump's comments, "dog whistles" for the white supremacists, in other words, a message for them, which they only can hear. i think there is a great deal of truth to that. Trump lost a lawsuit saying that he violated equal opportunity in housing, by discriminating against blacks. He never admitted fault, but lost the case, and paid the penalty. I don't think Trump is racist, specifically. I think he thought black tenants would lower his property values, and so his people screened them out, when they applied. His prejudice is not "against black" but, "for green." But Trump got a lot of mileage on the Birther debate, and against Obama, part of that is that Obama is the most radical president we have ever had, and America is a lot more conservative than the coasts will admit. By conservative, I don't mean racists. Fact is, most Hispanics and Blacks, even though they vote democratic, are actually quite conservative in their values, particularly religion.

got to shut up for now, not sure I finished the thought, but lost what I was going to say<grin>.

got to shut up for now, not sure I finished the thought, but lost what I was going to say<grin>

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 24 Dec 2017 at 11:16

With age, the second thing to go, is the mind, I don't remember what the first is.

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 25 Dec 2017 at 03:09

franciscosan wrote:

I am not saying that Donald Trump has a conscience, you said that conflicts of interest and consciences weren't to be found in the USA (I paraphrase). Look at what you wrote.

Donald Trump, as I have said elsewhere, has sociopathic tendencies. But then again, so do a fair number of very successful businessmen of the dog eat dog school of business.

Since you are qualified to make psychiatric evaluations why didn't you notice what a loser Hillary was? You never complained about Obama much either. Your bias and niche-worship has blinded you to common sense.

I think that his followers are deluding themselves.

So you were a Hillary/Obama follower? Stop making practical thinking demonic, your spirit is crushed by Trump's lack of failure. You are demolished by low enemployment and great 401k earnings. You don't care that stock market and consumer confidence is up. Maybe none of that effects you and you are just concerned with your personal distaste.

I don't think that blindly carrying out campaign promises makes a good president. The President is supposed to be able to adapt to the situation, Trump seems to want to adapt the situation to himself.

Yea just blindly doing what he was elected to do, lol you reject progress rather than admit any success. He doesn't need your approval or the liberal press, who incidentally toyomotor do LIE about how many people show up to see Trump and then admit that they deserve to be scorned for NOT DOING their JOB.

Trump should be ashamed for calling the shots. He needs to learn a good kowtow like Obama. Who is now being investigated for giving a green light to HAMAS to sell drugs. Looking the other way to keep his bought -off and nuclear armed Iran intact. So I wouldn't toss him up to history yet, or Hillary, today isn't done with them.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 25 Dec 2017 at 10:12

I thought Obama was a mistake in many ways, I feel that Hilary would have been a mistake in many ways, but not to the extent that I think Trump is a mistake. Obama handled the 2008 meltdown fairly well, although I have a problem with the whole notion of "too big to fail." But, Obama was otherwise in many ways anti-business, berating Wall Street from the bully pulpit of the Presidency. So I would expect Wall Street to act towards in anyone else in a positive manner. I don't see Trump _doing_ anything in the way of promoting sound economic policy, in fact the opposite in cancelling joint agreements. He has done some stunts, like getting Pence to give the air conditioner company in Indiana sweetheart deals, so half the union workers can keep their jobs, (but just the union workers). That is not a substitute for a comprehensive policy on the economy. But, no, you didn't know me when Obama was elected, and for sake of argument, let's say that Obama was an accident, but there is no use crying over spilled milk. Donald Trump is an accident that is happening right now, and we can either mitigate the damage, or we can fantasize that such a vicious and small-minded man is good thing. Maybe you justify such viciousness, saying that everybody deserves it. Perhaps you are right, perhaps we get the president we deserve, and that worries me.

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 25 Dec 2017 at 13:30

Well I would list some of Trump's economic successes and his policies towards regulation. A lot has happened since Pence and the air conditioners and your omissions are just as dishonest as any lie Trump ever told.

I could explain that poor people are not paying taxes in the US and Trump hasn't changed that fact.

Why bother? You'll say "Oh I don't know..." and you don't bc you are only interested in negative things to say about Trump just like the liberal media and the dnc and let's add Mueller's FBI to that list, where lovers can save the world from elected officials but they can not keep their oaths.

Accidental like Hillary's nomination and Obama's presidency.

Yes I knew you in 2015 when Seymour Hirsch (NYT) was reporting on the Al Nusra ratline used by Hillary's state department to funnel nerve gas to the so called opposition of Assad in Syria. Samples of what was reported as Assad's used gas were identical the US's own supply that was delivered by Obama's white house into Syria.

You said virtually nothing about Obama and wouldn't even discuss Benghazi.

We didn't deserve Obama and you decline to list all of the calamitous effects of Trump's accidental presidency. You do find many opportunities to discredit him with personal dislike and how sure you are that all of his presidency will be "damage" but no facts. Just whining ,fake news, lack of knowledge current events. You say a lot then you say you don't know.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 26 Dec 2017 at 07:57

What omissions? I do not read the Newspaper, or follow a news program, I occasionally catch something that my mom watches, and sometimes I listen to NPR in the car, but usually I listen to talking books, or lecture courses in the car. I do get headlines from the WSJ, and mom likes to read to me articles from her newsmagazines, whether I want her to or not. I get snippets here and there, often with very good analysis, Shields and Brooks, Krauthammer, but snippets. So if there are omissions, it is only intentional in that I don't want to spend more time making up for them.

As far as his successes are concerned, I once went to a CIA recruiting presentation (I protested it, but I also wanted to see it.) At the end of the presentation, the representative said, "you only hear about the CIAs failures, you never hear about its successes." At which point, I asked him to tell us about some of those successes. So I ask you, "what about those successes?" and don't beg off that I already know about them, because I probably don't (whether they are truly positive or not). Then again, I didn't know about the minutia of Obama's decisions either.

One problem with Donald Trump always shooting his mouth off, is that the media feels compelled to chase after it. Which means that other things are being done, that should be reported and are not. I think that Reagan was a master at this, the media getting all alarmed at something he said, the difference however, is that Reagan in general was good natured.

An accident, not accidental. Although every presidency is accidental to a certain degree, in that chance plays a role.

I've read about Seymour Hirsch somewhere, but I don't remember him except as a Clinton crony. I don't read the New York Times, except sometimes the front page at Starbuck, while waiting for a brew. I don't find Benghazi particularly interesting, yes, Hillary screwed up, that is part of having power, you screw up, people get killed, hopefully (for others) you learn your lesson. I saw the movie on Benghazi, I assume it was generally accurate. Kind of like Black Hawk Down, also in another way, with Black Hawk Down, less than 20 casualties compared to 1000 enemy, and we felt inclined to pull out. It is not clear there are any superpowers in the world, either people have the way but not the will (US, etc) or the will but not the way (everybody but US and Western Europe). Four casualties in the old days, would be a mosquito bite, although that one was the ambassador is significant.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 26 Dec 2017 at 12:12

It is so nice that President Trump won the war on Christmas!

How can we tell President Trump true achievements, when he takes credit for _everything_?

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 26 Dec 2017 at 12:41

franciscosan wrote:

What omissions? I do not read the Newspaper, or follow a news program, I occasionally catch something that my mom watches, and sometimes I listen to NPR in the car, but usually I listen to talking books, or lecture courses in the car. I do get headlines from the WSJ, and mom likes to read to me articles from her newsmagazines, whether I want her to or not. I get snippets here and there, often with very good analysis, Shields and Brooks, Krauthammer, but snippets. So if there are omissions, it is only intentional in that I don't want to spend more time making up for them.

Maybe if you followed the actual events instead of the ongoing personal attacks you would be forced to reconsider your opinion or your opinions espoused thus far.

As far as his successes are concerned, I once went to a CIA recruiting presentation (I protested it, but I also wanted to see it.) At the end of the presentation, the representative said, "you only hear about the CIAs failures, you never hear about its successes." At which point, I asked him to tell us about some of those successes. So I ask you, "what about those successes?" and don't beg off that I already know about them, because I probably don't (whether they are truly positive or not). Then again, I didn't know about the minutia of Obama's decisions either.

I'd love to take the time and the trouble just so you can say "I don't know" if you want to know enlighten yourself. Aren't you listening to someone about politics? Besides Mom's newspapers?

Did your CIA friend tell you that they were very successful and stealthy in dosing people with LSD? :)

One problem with Donald Trump always shooting his mouth off, is that the media feels compelled to chase after it.

Like dog & tennis ball.

Which means that other things are being done, that should be reported and are not. I think that Reagan was a master at this, the media getting all alarmed at something he said, the difference however, is that Reagan in general was good natured.

Lots of things being done and no, Trump is good natured but he doesn't roll over to be politically correct like Obama & rest of the leftist liberal cabal.

An accident, not accidental. Although every presidency is accidental to a certain degree, in that chance plays a role.

I've read about Seymour Hirsch somewhere, but I don't remember him except as a Clinton crony. I don't read the New York Times, except sometimes the front page at Starbuck, while waiting for a brew. I don't find Benghazi particularly interesting, yes, Hillary screwed up, that is part of having power, you screw up, people get killed, hopefully (for others) you learn your lesson. I saw the movie on Benghazi, I assume it was generally accurate. Kind of like Black Hawk Down, also in another way, with Black Hawk Down, less than 20 casualties compared to 1000 enemy, and we felt inclined to pull out. It is not clear there are any superpowers in the world, either people have the way but not the will (US, etc) or the will but not the way (everybody but US and Western Europe). Four casualties in the old days, would be a mosquito bite, although that one was the ambassador is significant.

My bad wrong spelling, Seymour Hersh-

Seymour Hersh: Assad Innocent

A renowned investigative journalist has revealed in a worldwide exposé, which received almost no attention in the United States, that the Obama administration has known all along—and the establishment media has covered up—the fact thatSyrian President Bashar al-Assad never gassed his own people in August 2013. This news comes as Secretary of State John Kerry continues to lie to the American people and the world about Syria in order to gin up support for an overthrow of the government in that Middle Eastern country.

In “ http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line" rel="nofollow - - Seymour M. Hersh explains that a sample of the sarin gas used in the August 21 attacks on Ghouta, Syria, was provided to British intelligence at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porton_Down" rel="nofollow -

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 26 Dec 2017 at 12:58

franciscosan wrote:

It is so nice that President Trump won the war on Christmas!

How can we tell President Trump true achievements, when he takes credit for _everything_?

Most people know he is joking although people are saying it A LOT! Do you object?

Right toyomotor. Please tell me about the first poor person who paid your salary.

Poor people do not pay taxes in US. In fact you get $2000 ( increased by $1000 for a total 3 grand for poor families) per child back from the government if you worked but still don't owe taxes bc of your income.

Regulations were killing american business and they were leaving for Ireland and building factories overseas. That matters to people who live and work here, again cost of living has been on the rise since the 1970's.

Wages have stagnated or decreased until this POTUS started to change things. You are not hearing that from CNN. Their audience is academia (shameful standards) people who don't work & students.

They can't tell the difference between Obama first 100 days and Trump's. *edit

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

An attempted terrorist attack caused massive chaos during Monday morning’s rush hour in New York City, but some CNN viewers could be in the dark because the network spent an inordinate amount of time covering an anti-Trump story about the president’s soda consumption while details of the chaotic situation unfolded.

At 8:45 a.m. ET a law enforcement official told reporters, including the Associated Press, that a man had a pipe bomb strapped to him when it went off on a New York City subway platform. That was roughly the same time that CNN was in the middle of a segment that featured the chyron,

“NYT Report: Trump drinks a dozen diet cokes per day,” while a large graphic promoting Tuesday’s Election Night in Alabama took up a significant portion of the screen.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 28 Dec 2017 at 03:00

franciscosan wrote:

If you are an official and you have a "conflict of interest," you are supposed to recuse yourself. Donald Trump definitely does not do that, ever. What is supposed to happen if someone does not do that, I have no idea. Usually, someone recuses themselves from a conflict of interest, so that the decision, of the court, of the Senate, whatever, is not undermined. But, Donald Trump with his grandiose ego is not concerned with that. Donald Trump may want to un-make Barack Obama's legacy, but his own will be on very shaky ground. Not that Obama's was that solid either. The democrats abused their position in power during their 'leadership,' now the pendulum has seemed to have swung (too far) in the other direction. Barack Obama was the most radical member of the Senate, and did not serve a full term before being elected on a feel-good whim by the American people. All of a sudden, one could prove that one wasn't prejudiced by electing a black man who had no experience by which he could be judged. Of course, proving that one is not prejudiced in a vote, is itself prejudiced. Judge by the content of the character, not by the color of his skin. It has been awhile since judges had to have "no footsteps" in order to be nominated, no controversial decisions, no track record. Now we have that with first Barack Obama, and in another way with Donald Trump.

Tell your highly evolved thoughtful friends who may have been republicans like you during GW Bush admin. that ; Halliburton, Cheney & Bush boys are still raking in profits from invasion of Iraq.

An analysis by the Financial Times reveals the extent to which both American and foreign companies have profited from the conflict – with the top 10 contractors securing business worth at least $72bn between them.
None has benefited more than KBR, once known as Kellogg Brown and Root. The controversial former subsidiary of Halliburton, which was once run by Dick Cheney, vice-president to George W. Bush, was awarded at least $39.5bn in federal contracts related to the Iraq war over the past decade.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 28 Dec 2017 at 03:17

franciscosan wrote:

I thought Obama was a mistake in many ways, I feel that Hilary would have been a mistake in many ways, but not to the extent that I think Trump is a mistake. Obama handled the 2008 meltdown fairly well, although I have a problem with the whole notion of "too big to fail." But, Obama was otherwise in many ways anti-business, berating Wall Street from the bully pulpit of the Presidency.

I don't follow your logic. How can Obama be anti-business & pro corporate welfare? How did he handle the meltdown? With tax dollars & you know that, so your point is hard to find.

So I would expect Wall Street to act towards in anyone else in a positive manner. I don't see Trump _doing_ anything in the way of promoting sound economic policy, in fact the opposite in cancelling joint agreements.

if that is true can you elaborate? Bc I listen to CEO's and business experts on this & they don't agree with you so please enlighten me.

He has done some stunts, like getting Pence to give the air conditioner company in Indiana sweetheart deals, so half the union workers can keep their jobs, (but just the union workers). That is not a substitute for a comprehensive policy on the economy.

Trump was a candidate when he & Mike Pence convinced a large commercial air conditioning manufacturer to stay in the US rather than relocate to Mexico. Trump made it clear that they would be paying 35% tax on every air conditioner they sold once he became POTUS & they believed him.

You can't tell me about one job that Hillary or Obama created either during their time in office or as private citizens. Obama and Hillary are not here to make the lives of individuals better. They are promoting a one world leveling of every body on the planet except for elites like themselves.

[/QUOTE]

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 28 Dec 2017 at 10:21

I believe that the president should not target individual companies for putative measures. I generally believe in a free market approach which means if labor costs too much in the United States, business will go elsewhere. Of course, that process can be hampered by protectionist legislation. But that will also mean that the products will be more expensive. So you keep some jobs (not all jobs, just some union ones), in the coddling and special treatment of specific businesses by government, but you interfere in the labor market, and you interfere in the price of goods in the market. In trying to control one aspect of the market, the cost in other respects goes up. There is no such thing as a free lunch, although to those who resent inherited wealth, it might seem so. There is a name for "too big to fail" and other practices, "corporate cronyism." that was prevalent with Obama. Trump is different only in the sense that corporate cronyism is now a reward for doing what he wants, and he seems to want to penalize those who don't do what he wants. Like I said, he is a bully, Obama could be a bully, but he was not vicious like Trump is. I think that you, Vanuatu, do not take Trump's viciousness seriously.

No, I don't think he is joking, Donald Trump will take credit for anything positive whether he did it or not. He will take credit for saving Christmas, although the biggest threat to Christmas is the rampant commercialism.

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 31 Dec 2017 at 10:50

franciscosan wrote:

I believe that the president should not target individual companies for putative measures. I generally believe in a free market approach which means if labor costs too much in the United States, business will go elsewhere. Of course, that process can be hampered by protectionist legislation. But that will also mean that the products will be more expensive. So you keep some jobs (not all jobs, just some union ones), in the coddling and special treatment of specific businesses by government, but you interfere in the labor market, and you interfere in the price of goods in the market. In trying to control one aspect of the market, the cost in other respects goes up. There is no such thing as a free lunch, although to those who resent inherited wealth, it might seem so. There is a name for "too big to fail" and other practices, "corporate cronyism." that was prevalent with Obama. Trump is different only in the sense that corporate cronyism is now a reward for doing what he wants, and he seems to want to penalize those who don't do what he wants. Like I said, he is a bully, Obama could be a bully, but he was not vicious like Trump is. I think that you, Vanuatu, do not take Trump's viciousness seriously.

No, I don't think he is joking, Donald Trump will take credit for anything positive whether he did it or not. He will take credit for saving Christmas, although the biggest threat to Christmas is the rampant commercialism.

Trump didn't target individual companies, he told Carrier that they would be paying a higher tax if was elected. And Carrier knew corporations would be getting tax break from Trump so they stayed in the US.

Saved some jobs. Of course that's not a good thing ask anyone at CNN.

I definitely do think he can be a vicious person. What can I say? Obama was nauseating, all that bowing.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 31 Dec 2017 at 11:39

Carrier got a sweetheart deal from the governor of Indiana who just 'happened' to be Mike Pence. There was a bit of special treatment for Carrier. There was a hell of a carrot especially crafted for Carrier, and their was a pretty big stick promised against them too. Still, Carrier did move to Mexico, they just left some jobs (_some_ union jobs, not all) in Indiana, the non-union personnel got the shaft, at least that is my understanding. Oh, I believe the governor promised them subsidies and tax breaks to stay. This kind of special deal, was crafted especially for Carrier, using the Indiana governorship to do a deal for the incoming Trump-Pence administration.

If one believes that government is supposed to create a level playing field, then what Trump did for Carrier is 'highly irregular.' Having state and Federal government 'tilt' the playing field will not in the long run, result in an unsound business model become sound. Oh, let me revise that, if you have governmental interference, you can make a unsound business model appear sound, but then you can do that only if you rely on a model of government (like socialistic subsidies), that in its bed rock is itself unsound. The question is, is it the role of government to decide who is too big/precious/influential to fail? I guess so. Of course, Trump wouldn't have any problem with this, 'conscious' wise, after all, the banks decided that he was 'worth more to them alive, then he was to them dead,' and bailed him out, when they should have let him go under from the dead weight of an airline, and two empty Atlantic City casinos. He is doing the same, not out of the goodness of his heart, nor because it is good economic policy, but because now they owe him, or rather because now he owns them. Something that appeals to his feudal mentality. I wonder if all the union workers at Carrier who kept their jobs swore a loyalty oath to the great Don? Oh, it would have been poetic justice for Trump to have failed, after shafting so many little guys to whom he owed money. I am not sure that socially the banks did society a favor by bailing out Donald Trump.

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2018 at 11:43

franciscosan wrote:

Carrier got a sweetheart deal from the governor of Indiana who just 'happened' to be Mike Pence. There was a bit of special treatment for Carrier. There was a hell of a carrot especially crafted for Carrier, and their was a pretty big stick promised against them too. Still, Carrier did move to Mexico, they just left some jobs (_some_ union jobs, not all) in Indiana, the non-union personnel got the shaft, at least that is my understanding. Oh, I believe the governor promised them subsidies and tax breaks to stay. This kind of special deal, was crafted especially for Carrier, using the Indiana governorship to do a deal for the incoming Trump-Pence administration.

No secrets here all out in the open. You see wage earners have a different perspective and labeling it in order to negate the benefits won't change the positive impact on real people.

If one believes that government is supposed to create a level playing field, then what Trump did for Carrier is 'highly irregular.' Having state and Federal government 'tilt' the playing field will not in the long run, result in an unsound business model become sound. Oh, let me revise that, if you have governmental interference, you can make a unsound business model appear sound, but then you can do that only if you rely on a model of government (like socialistic subsidies), that in its bed rock is itself unsound. The question is, is it the role of government to decide who is too big/precious/influential to fail? I guess so.

To Big To Fail relates to Trump eh? "Creating a level playing field" is Trump rhetoric? Not Obama's? Don't remember Solyndra failure? LOL

Taxpayers are on the hook for more than $2.2 billion in expected costs from the federal government’s energy loan guarantee programs, according to a new audit Monday that suggests the controversial projects may not pay for themselves, as officials had promised.

Nearly $1 billion in loans have already defaulted under the https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/united-states-department-of-energy/" rel="nofollow - Energy Department program, which included the infamous Solyndra stimulus project and dozens of other green technology programs the https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/barack-obama/" rel="nofollow - Obama administration has approved, totaling nearly about $30 billion in taxpayer backing, the https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/government-accountability-office/" rel="nofollow - Government Accountability Office reported in its audit.

Of course, Trump wouldn't have any problem with this, 'conscious' wise, after all, the banks decided that he was 'worth more to them alive, then he was to them dead,' and bailed him out, when they should have let him go under from the dead weight of an airline, and two empty Atlantic City casinos. He is doing the same, not out of the goodness of his heart, nor because it is good economic policy, but because now they owe him, or rather because now he owns them. Something that appeals to his feudal mentality. I wonder if all the union workers at Carrier who kept their jobs swore a loyalty oath to the great Don? Oh, it would have been poetic justice for Trump to have failed, after shafting so many little guys to whom he owed money. I am not sure that socially the banks did society a favor by bailing out Donald Trump.

Even though you can't document the union story ( which really isn't shocking) and it shouldn't be offensive to liberals- you will continue citing it as though it were factual a la CNN. Of course Union members do better, get more-that's_ why_ they_ join and pay dues.

Who thinks Trump does anything because of some saintly inspiration? Which government bailout?

Now don't stray from the OP, Bailouts didn't start with Trump.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 03 Jan 2018 at 07:46

Government should create equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Unions have guaranteed it that pay in the United States is prohibitively high for companies, and priced themselves out of the market. Once upon a time, the US did not have any economic competition, because the rest of the world had destroyed itself. At this time unions felt inclined to ask for higher wages and pensions, and the companies were inclined to give it to them, because they thought that the good times would go on forever. Lo, they didn't go on forever, but that hasn't prevented a desire for more and more, while the market has gotten less and less.

I have some sympathy for a poor, hungry Mexican, Chinese, or Vietnamese, especially when Union workers in the United States can't work for anything less than $ 30/ hour.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 08 Jan 2018 at 10:47

Last week there was a reporter interviewed on Fresh Air (pod casts online), who wrote an article "Making China Great Again." In other words, Trump has pulled the US out of relationships in the Pacific Rim, and China is taking up his invitation and moving in. China has had a long tradition of courting the barbarian with flattery, and so they laid it down with trowel during Trump's visit and Donald ate it all up. He was critical of the Chinese during the campaign, but now, not so much.

Far from making America "great again," President Trump seems to be putting America in the toilet. I am not sure whether Donald Trump is intentionally Russia's or China's stooge, or if it is just working out that way. And yes, I am inclined to believing much of the media. For those who cry that the media does not like Trump, I am inclined to say, what is there to like? But of course, being liked is not a prerequisite for being President, at least not universally liked. Respected, that may be another matter. Trump confuses being feared with being respected.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2018 at 12:41

Apparently, Donald Trump paid off a pornstar "Stormy Daniels" a month before the election, six figures to keep quiet about their encounter in 2006. Trump is the gift that keeps on giving, and not just to reporters.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2018 at 13:23

A very important and topical issue confronting said man is the failure/refusal of the Senate to pass financial legislation.

I have no dog in this fight, so I'm asking, what exactly does it mean to the majority of Americans when the government "shuts down", which is the phrase being used by the media.

I note that some non-essential civil servants are being sent on leave, so what else happens? How do the essential national services carry on with no money?

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 22 Jan 2018 at 12:34

The funny thing is that the Democrats are the party of (big) government, and they are the ones who are shutting it down, although they would claim that it is the Republicans because the Republicans won't do what they want, there were a few Republicans who voted against it too. It is also funny because they are going to bat for illegal aliens, albeit "dreamers" who moved to the United States with their parents when they were children. The "dreamers" have a great deal of sympathy amongst both Democrats, Independents, and probably many Republicans.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 22 Jan 2018 at 21:36

Franciscosan

That's all well and good, but you didn't answer my question.

Are you wandering off again?

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2018 at 09:26

Are you asking me what happens when the giant octopus with tendrils into every aspect of American life goes to sleep? I don't know, people will be inconvenienced, what do you expect to happen? Some people will like the government shutdown, and some won't. For some it will be an advantage and for others it will be a disadvantage. For more it will be perceived as a disadvantage because rightfully or wrongfully, they need their fix, and the government plays the role of giving it to them. But, as I pointed out, it is the party of big government that is inconveniencing people, although people tend to fault those in power (the Republicans) whether it is their "fault" or not. That is one thing the Democrats are banking on, that Republicans will feel the heat more than they will.

But, this is a hiccup. not a lingering illness. I expect it will be "fixed" in a few days, I hope.

Why do you think I am able to judge such a mess at the beginning of it? wait until its over, and then I will still avoid the question, because I don't really know except for cliches that you can probably grasp on your own.

Just because you ask a question and I don't answer it does not mean I am off topic (and you are not). You ignored my comment on the 'important' issue of Stormy Daniels.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2018 at 12:12

franciscosan wrote:

Apparently, Donald Trump paid off a pornstar "Stormy Daniels" a month before the election, six figures to keep quiet about their encounter in 2006. Trump is the gift that keeps on giving, and not just to reporters.

More than a few famous Americans, including Presidents, have been accused of involvement in sexual peccadillos during their careers.

Does it make them less qualified or able to govern? I don't think so.

The media has a bad habit of jumping on stories of a very personal or private nature when it comes to famous people-this resulted in the birth of the paparazzi.

Personally, I don't care if politicians have sexual adventures or drive their cars over the speed limit, as long as they're able to do the job that they were elected to do, and their private lives don't influence their decision making.

I think that there's far too much intrusion into the private lives of celebrities.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2018 at 12:19

franciscosan wrote:

Are you asking me what happens when the giant octopus with tendrils into every aspect of American life goes to sleep? I don't know, people will be inconvenienced, what do you expect to happen? Some people will like the government shutdown, and some won't. For some it will be an advantage and for others it will be a disadvantage. For more it will be perceived as a disadvantage because rightfully or wrongfully, they need their fix, and the government plays the role of giving it to them. But, as I pointed out, it is the party of big government that is inconveniencing people, although people tend to fault those in power (the Republicans) whether it is their "fault" or not. That is one thing the Democrats are banking on, that Republicans will feel the heat more than they will.

But, this is a hiccup. not a lingering illness. I expect it will be "fixed" in a few days, I hope.

Why do you think I am able to judge such a mess at the beginning of it? wait until its over, and then I will still avoid the question, because I don't really know except for cliches that you can probably grasp on your own.

Just because you ask a question and I don't answer it does not mean I am off topic (and you are not). You ignored my comment on the 'important' issue of Stormy Daniels.

Franciscosan

Perhaps you've misinterpreted what I was asking.

For example,in Australia if the Opposition or the Senate blocked supply (The Annual Budget Bill), it would be cause for intervention by the Governor General (as in 1975) to either dismiss the government and give government to the opposition, or to call a General Election-all positions being vacant. This would be a very major step.

In essence, it would mean that all employees of the Federal Government would not be paid, and the functions of government would close if the situation was not resolved quickly. The country would close for government business.

It doesn't take an Einstein to work out what that would cause, chaos, even anarchy.

That's what I'm asking, how would the US respond to a "closure"?

(I know, it's all irrelevant now, the impasse is over)

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2018 at 14:24

Republicans shut down government over Obamacare during President Obama's second term. We are still here. The beast has a lot of inertia, perhaps payments get delayed for some a few days, but it does not mean they are not still owed. Of course, we might go through the whole thing again in 3 weeks:( We don't really operate on a budget these days, we just kick the can down the road.

They say that droughts don't effect trees until three years later.....

President Trump has been yo-yoing back and forth on DACA. They say that if you are an advisor, you either want to be the last to see him before the decision, or the first to see him that day. President Trump has been nice to the democrats in the room and then bashing them on twitter. I would say he is the master of mixed signals, but that would imply that there is a method to his madness.

Btw, President Trump got a physical (military doctor, not his own quack), his cognitive ability is unimpaired, but he counts as obese, so do 36 % of American adults.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 24 Jan 2018 at 12:38

Paying off prostitutes is not a legitimate use of campaign funds, and Donald Trump paid, so she wouldn't hurt his campaign. It is (probably) a violation of campaign finance laws. I say probably, but almost certainly.

It speaks about his judgment, just as Monica Lewinsky speaks about Bill Clinton's judgment. It also speaks to whether the Russians might have run him through a honey-trap. How many ways can Trump be bought? Let me count..... He fell in love with China after they wooed him.

Ironically again, the people who usually care about such things in American politics are the Right, but Trump is buying them off through promoting their fringe. The left who is up in arms, usually is a lot more "liberal" when it comes to infidelity and hanky-panky. I don't think that will change, except that the left is wearing on their sleeves the anti-sexual harassment badge these days. We will see whether that sticks for the long term. maybe it will, maybe from now on the only people that the Democrats will screw are the ones who want to get screwed.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 24 Jan 2018 at 13:16

And all of this has what to do with the so-called shutdown?

Does presidential wannabe involvement with a porn star-or anyone else, reduce his ability to govern? (and I'm not saying that Trump has any ability to govern anyway)

Provided he's not placed himself of a position of potential blackmail or outside influence, so what?

And you still haven't addressed my question, if you're unable to, just say so.

And just to go off topic a bit further, under the Westminster System of government, it's not possible for a Prime Minister to order the dismissal of senior Public Servants-unless of course they've been proven to be guilty of some misconduct.

The problem, as I see it is that seems to be an expectation that our politicians all be lily-white, with not even the slightest stain on their character. A most unrealistic expectation in my view.

Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone!

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 25 Jan 2018 at 15:05

If you want to see what happens with a government shutdown, look at the one during the Obama. Study it, after 3 years of studying it and the current shutdown, maybe you will know what happens during a shutdown. I don't think you understand, I am not here to answer your impossible questions. I am here to try to give a little insight into the silliness, but also the seriousness of Trump. The "important" questions. So if you want to go off topic, and ask about something so huge, that nobody really understands all the ramifications, you can, I can tell you a little bit more than you know, but I don't know that much, nobody does, 50 years later we will look back and have a better understanding, that's called history. But why do you expect me to do your homework for you? I have suggested you look up commentators like Shields and Brooks, and Fareed Zakaria, have you looked them up? Look them up on the issue and then ask me about what they say. If you want... you don't have to do anything you don't want, but please don't ask me to define the universe and give three examples....

The relevance of the porn star pay off is 1) that he will pay off instead of face the music, is he being blackmailed by Russia, how would we know? He has worked to cover up something as stupid as a time with a porn star, why would he not try to cover up Russian involvement. As I said before, 2) paying off a porn star is a violation of campaign law, and illegal use of funds to influence the outcome of the campaign. Now they are not going to take it away from him, at least not yet. 3) The United States is a lot more conservative than the press will admit, 3) it does matter that he 'associates' with porn stars. Fundamentalists care about such moral lapses, or at least they pretend to do so. In another thread I asked what would it take for supporters to become disenchanted with him. Some are becoming more disenchanted, some see no problem at all, and some seem to want to give him a blank check as long as he plays lip service to the "conservative" agenda.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 26 Jan 2018 at 10:58

OK, so you don't know what happens when the US government "shuts down".

We'll leave it that.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2018 at 08:35

Fareed Zakaria said that President Trump (teleprompter Trump) did well at Davos.

He says there are three Trumps:

1Twitter Trump,

2Demagogic Trump

3and (mainstream) Republican Trump (or teleprompter Trump).

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 07 Feb 2018 at 10:53

President Trump did not say that the democrats where treasonous for not clapping at the state of the union speech, he said that 'somebody else said that. and why not? (adopt that view)'

The democrats said that they did not clap because Trump was fishing for compliments for improving the economy and they (the democrats) did not think he did anything, but that the improvement started under Barack Obama.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 07 Feb 2018 at 11:51

President Trump did not say that the democrats where treasonous for not clapping at the state of the union speech, he said that 'somebody else said that. and why not?

But there is a certain kernel of truth there, voting registration campaigns and high voter turnout benefits democrats, they don't do it out of the goodness of their heart. Republicans and conservatives, however, are more organized and more likely to, individually, vote. The new voter tends to say, "what can politics do for me," democrats are the party of welfare programs, although until Barack Obama and Obamacare, the democrats have been very careful to get some Republicans on board as well.

Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are whipping up static, they don't care about the accuracy of their reports, but only their superficial verisimilitude. But they are doing it because 1) voter registration etc, benefits the democrats, 2) It is not like the democrats would care if illegals were voting, they oppose Republican attempts at voter ids.

And that's precisely why Trumps advisers are trying to stop him from appearing in person before the Mueller probe-he's a loose canon, shoots from the lip before engaging his brain, often gets lost midway through a sentence.

Trump seems to believe the lies that he tells, and that will bring him undone, he seems to think that he's politically immortal AND HE'S NOT!!!

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 08 Feb 2018 at 07:37

You posted a link on criticism of voter registration in California, and I told you what was behind the criticism, talking heads like Coulter and Limbaugh attack registration plans in California, regardless of whether those are the actual plans, because anyone with any political astuteness will know that registration campaigns are darlings of the Democrats, whereas they will fight voter photo id bills tooth and nail. Democrats want to leave it loose because it benefits them, and that is part of the truth behind why democrats are criticized for not caring whether voters are legit.

It is interesting how one could not have imagined Trump-as-President 14 years ago (some people may have supported him back then, but I still say they couldn't have imagined "now." Or Obama 20 years ago. and we cannot imagine what is around the corner. I don't know if that gives me hope or dread.

I think you had a typo in that last sentence, I think you were trying to say that 'He's politically immoral."

I think you had a typo in that last sentence, I think you were trying to say that

'He's politically immoral."

And that too!

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 09 Feb 2018 at 09:05

Some people (including Donald Trump) think that Donald Trump is being unfairly picked on. But, I think there has always been a cutting edge to discourse about/ towards/ against the president. And probably there have always been people oversensitive about what is said about the President, or maybe I should say, humorless. It has been unusual when the President himself is thin skinned about it. Nixon was somewhat that way too.

There of course, have been other people that have been the press' darling. Barack Obama and John F. Kennedy was that way. (Oh! Camelot!), but even then, the press and the comedians would take a swipe at them, but their heart was not actually into it. I actually find comedy during Democratic administrations to be more insightful, more in touch with the absolutely absurd element in politics. Comedy during Republican administrations tends to be more vicious, the monotony of saying of George W. "he's so stupid." Not only was it not true, but after the first few declarations, it was not original.

Another thing, not true, Oh! Obama! he's so smart, he is a constitutional law scholar! No, he was a lawyer who taught a few adjunct classes on law, constitutional law.

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 16 Feb 2018 at 12:48

One reason why the religious right is relatively immune to the criticism of Trump and his improprieties is that he is making some progress on issues like abortion. Health and Human Services is blocking Obama era funding for teen pregnancy courses, put on by organizations like Planned Parenthood (which does abortions), and is advocating abstinence only courses. Also immigration programs that provide abortions to women coming in on refugee status, women who have faced traumatic circumstances, is being prevented. Plus the religious rights biggest hope is to get conservative judges on the Supreme Court, to reverse Roe vs. Wade. Even if there was a conservative majority, it is doubtful, looking at the Supreme Court in the past, that that would happen. Conservatives tend to be skeptical about judicial activism, and judicial activism in the late 60s, early 70s, does not justify judicial activism today. Two wrongs don't make a right.

From what I understand, American abortion laws are quite liberal compared to other nations, and don't make much sense (the three trimester's division in law does not correspond to anything in biology.). It would be nice to change the law so that abortion would not be legal, after the fetus was viable. Now one thing I don't understand, is why religious conservatives are opposed to birth control. Abortion is used as a substitute for birth control, so it seems to me that allowing birth control would cut down on the need for abortion.

There was a conservative back in the '80s whose position on abortion really made sense, he said that a woman does not want an abortion like she wants a new coat, she wants an abortion in the sense that she is trapped, and wants out of the trap. His answer was to fix the economic and social conditions that create that trap, and then see what is left over. He made sense, but of course neither side in the abortion debate liked his response.

But my point is that this is a key issue a lot of religious conservatives, and President Trump is doing something about it. Look at it from the religious conservatives perspective, what is more important, Trump lying, or people committing murder of little babies?

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 03 Mar 2018 at 19:47

Trump, the 'important' issues

It will come as no surprise to some members that I've been described as being "Anti-Trump".

It's true, I admit it.

One aspect of Trump's personality that I particularly dislike is the number of lies that he tells, most to his own self agrandisement, the rest to belittle or hurt someone else.

(Extract) The most stunning way Trump's lies differed from our participants', though, was in their cruelty. An astonishing 50 percent of Trump's lies were hurtful or disparaging. For example, he proclaimed that John Brennan, James Clapper and James Comey, all career intelligence or law enforcement officials, were "political hacks." He said that "the Sloppy Michael Moore Show on Broadway was a TOTAL BOMB and was forced to close." He insisted that other "countries, they don't put their finest in the lottery system. They put people probably in many cases that they don't want." And he claimed that "Ralph Northam, who is running for Governor of Virginia, is fighting for the violent MS-13 killer gangs & sanctuary cities."

and further

(Extract) The sheer frequency of Trump's lies appears to be having an effect, and it may not be the one he is going for. A Politico/Morning Consult poll from late October showed that only 35 percent of voters believed that Trump was honest, while 51 percent said he was not honest. (The others said they didn't know or had no opinion.) Results of a Quinnipiac University poll from November were similar: Thirty-seven percent of voters thought Trump was honest, compared with 58 percent who thought he was not.

For fewer than 40 percent of American voters to see the president as honest is truly remarkable. Most humans, most of the time, believe other people. That's our default setting. Usually, we need a reason to disbelieve.

Research on the detection of deception consistently documents this "truth bias." In the typical study, participants observe people making statements and are asked to indicate, each time, whether they think the person is lying or telling the truth. Measuring whether people believe others should be difficult to do accurately, because simply asking the question disrupts the tendency to assume that other people are telling the truth. It gives participants a reason to wonder. And yet, in our statistical summary of more than 200 studies, Charles F. Bond Jr. and I found that participants still believed other people more often than they should have — 58 percent of the time in studies in which only half of the statements were truthful. People are biased toward believing others, even in studies in which they are told explicitly that only half of the statements they will be judging are truths.

By telling so many lies, and so many that are mean-spirited, Trump is violating some of the most fundamental norms of human social interaction and human decency. Many of the rest of us, in turn, have abandoned a norm of our own — we no longer give Trump the benefit of the doubt that we usually give so readily.

That as many as 58% of the people surveyed, in one survey, didn't think Trump is honest, should be of a worry for him and his advisors.

The problem is, he started off on DAY ONE with blatant lies about the size of the crowd at his inauguration, and carried on from there. Obviously the media jumped all over it, and some have been keeping a very careful "Fact Checking" file on his every public statement. Not surprisingly, they have caught him out

"In Trump's first 298 days in office, however, he made 1,628 false or misleading claims or flip-flops, by The Post's tally.

These facts have been publicised by a number of the US Print Media, so many in fact that I could not believe that they're printing False Facts.

President Trump needs to address this issue with his incoming Press Secretary/Media Advisor, and curtail his comments as well as his tweets. If he thinks that the majority of American citizens either don't know about his lies, or that they believe him, he's in serious political doo doo!

The other "Elephant in the Room" is the apparent chaos within the White House administrative force. How many Media Advisors so far? Is it five? National Security Advisors? Attorney's General? Who's next seems to be the question.

If I was Kelly, I'd be walking backwards wherever I go-protecting his back, and at least one other long time supporter is alleged to be on the chopping block, just waiting for the axe to fall.

Trump is not engendering the loyalty he claims he deserves, as he daily sacks important and knowledgeable people in his administration. Meanwhile, cases are mounting over his son, daughter and son-in-law over their lack of experience and knowledge, and their still strong links to private businesses, some which are at least tainted by contacts with foreign nationals at most inappropriate times.

My glass ball doesn't show him in office after the next Presidential Elections.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 04 Mar 2018 at 23:30

http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/donald-trump-jokes-at-gridiron-club-dinner-that-first-lady-melania-may-be-next-to-leave-the-white-house/news-story/b22c43f8d949caf5c784dc5f72c0538e" rel="nofollow - Donald Trump jokes at Gridiron Club dinner that first lady Melania may be next to leave the White House

WATCH THIS SPACE!

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 05 Mar 2018 at 09:16

Yes! Glad you kept this title for Important issues

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 05 Mar 2018 at 13:15

Vanuatu wrote:

Yes! Glad you kept this title for Important issues

Well, it could turn out important to Trump if she leaves. It would be a bad look, and he needs all of the good looks he can get, doesn't he?

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: Vanuatu
Date Posted: 06 Mar 2018 at 09:55

If you say so. Maybe if all the Hollywood types rub their Oscars and click their heels, they will be whisked away to a dimension where Oprah is president. And I wish them a good journey.

-------------Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 06 Mar 2018 at 17:56

Ay?

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 07 Mar 2018 at 07:01

Wizard of Oz reference. I don't think we're in Kansas anymore Toto.

Kansas is the land of Aahs. When you're driving through Kansas and you finally come to the Colorado/Kansas state border, you sigh a sigh of relief, aaah.

A mathematician in the Journal of Irreproducible Results actually proved that Kansas is literally "flatter than a pancake."

But that is neither here nor there as far as the important issues are concerned.

I feel a little bad for Melania, I think that she is bought and paid for, and so Trump can say obnoxious things about her, knowing ultimately that he is protected by a pre-nup, and so if she leaves she won't get anything. She seems to conscientiously use her position as First Lady, which is more than I can say about him.

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 07 Mar 2018 at 20:22

I feel a little bad for Melania, I think that she is bought and paid for, and so Trump can say obnoxious things about her, knowing ultimately that he is protected by a pre-nup, and so if she leaves she won't get anything. She seems to conscientiously use her position as First Lady, which is more than I can say about him.

I would hesitate at "brought and paid for". It makes her sound like a prostitute, which she clearly isn't. A trophy wife, maybe. And depending on the wording of the pre-nup, if Trump was to be found guilty of infidelity during his marriage to her, the pre-nup could go out the window.

It's a pity that such an attractive lady, probably highly intelligent too, has to put up with an a**hole like Trump.

And, do you really quote the Journal of Irreproducible Results as an irrefutable source of fact?

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: franciscosan
Date Posted: 08 Mar 2018 at 10:33

Magnify a pancake to the size of Kansas and then compare the two. Kansas is literally flatter than a pancake. The mathematics don't lie.

I think Trump treats them, his former wives, as if they were bought and paid for. I don't think the pre-nup limits him one bit.

She seems like she might be a decent person, on the other hand, 'she made her bed, and now she has to sleep in it.' (I don't think they are sleeping in the same bedrooms. That's just what I heard somewhere.

The President of the United States of America is about to embark on a course which will probably be the most important of any recent administration.

He's agreed to meet face to face with Kim Jong Un to discuss the nuclear arms and other issues.

The biggest risk to the outcome of this meeting, I suggest, is Trump himself. At present, North Korea is between a rock and a hard place. But Trump cannot afford to be his usual bombastic self. This is one meeting that will be needed to be handled with silk gloves.

If agreements can be worked out between the two Koreas and the USA, there is a more than even chance that UN restrictions will be lifted, and the overall best outcome would be that Kim becomes Trump's new best friend. A North Korean, for that matter a combined Korean partnership with the US could, within a few years, stifle China's incursions into the South China Sea.

On the other hand, if Kim is merely playing for time, while girding his loins for war with South Korea and the US, he would be playing, IMHO, a fatal game.

Neither Russia nor China would welcome a friendly relationship between the US and North Korea, but, in this case, North Korea and a lot to gain, and a very lot to lose.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 11 Mar 2018 at 20:05

Trump seems to have overlooked the fact that he's in no position to make demands of North Korea before meeting with Kim Jong Un.

If the current attitude prevails, that is, Trump demanding that NK agrees to get rid of it's nukes before any talks, Kim Jong Un could well tell him to get stuffed and that all bets are off. That of course wouldn't help NK very much as UN sanctions would remain in place. Nor would it help the USA, which would, in reality, be left with only two options:-

(a) Return home, tail between legs, maintaining the staus quo; or

(b) Giving Kim Jong Un a set period of time in which to dismantle his nukes, or suffer US military strikes against the missile sites.

Option (a) is simply not on, it ain't gonna happen!

Option (b) is more problematic, it would take time to organise amongst allies; would put Russia and China into an alliance against the USA and allies; and could be the catalyst for WW3.

The US diplomats will need to tread very carefully, and will possibly have to make some concessions in order to get Kim's full attention. What those concessions could be would be purely speculation. But the US must be prepared to do some horse trading if any agreement is to be reached.

And the USA is not the only interested party of course. South Korea, Japan, China and other Asia/Pacific countries in range of Kim's nukes all have a vested interest in the proceedings.

One of the best outcomes could be unification of the Korean Peninsula, but I don't see that happening any time soon. That one point, in and of itself, could well provoke armed hostilities with China, which would not want US militaria on it's borders-should the relationship develop.

Russia has long been a sponsor of North Korea. It also would not tolerate the US making incursions into it's area of influence.

But there is already a flash point in existence-that being the alleged breaching of UN sanctions by Russia and possibly also by China. If a confrontation takes place over these alleged breaches, all bets would be off.

It's all OK to walk softly and carry a big stick, but there are times when the stick should be covered with velvet.

I'll wait, along with the rest of the world, with bated breath.

-------------“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”

Posted By: toyomotor
Date Posted: 14 Mar 2018 at 13:14

Just read that Trump has fired Rex Tillerson, by Twitter, and also fired an aide who protested the action. It also looks like he has some others in his sights too.

To fire Tillerson now, I think is a big mistake-not the first Trump has made though. Tillerson comes across as the voice of reason and diplomacy, and that's exactly what Trump will need in his forthcoming talks with North Korea, not another sycophantic hawk.